Slanting the war coverage... That is the subject of this evening's Talking Points Memo.

Most military experts are saying the campaign in Iraq is an unprecedented success. The war is now six days old. The USA has losses of 20 dead and 14 captured or missing according to the Associated Press. The allies control most of the country and are knocking on the door of Saddam's bunker. But if you read The New York Times today, you might think Iraq was winning. The front page of the "Times" was full of ominous headlines. "Iraqis Repel Copters; One Goes Down." "GIs Regroup After Setback --Two Prisoners on Iraqi TV." "Hussein Rallies Iraqi Defenders." "The Goal Is Baghdad, but at What Cost?" All these headlines were on just one page. Unbelievable.

I have found CNN to be so anti-american , that it makes me beleive they are being controlled by the arab world. THe newscasters report with alook of dissain, continual coverage of anti-american protests, and whenever possible, get the shot of a crying Iraqi child in there.

The liberal shits running most of the media aren't smart enough to realize that Americans rally behind their troops in time of war. They are shooting themselves in the foot with their onesided coverage. When this thing is over America ought to rise up against the leftwing media and put the SOBS ought of business.

Meanwhile, Bush and Blair meet behind closed doors to decide how Kofi Annin and the UN can be included in a humanitarian aid project after the war is over. With the UN having forty billion in an escrow account and drawing two billion a month for administering the oil for food program, Kofi can see his cash cow getting thin on short pasture. GW and Tony see this as a golden opportunity to make the UN relevant again, as if it ever was. So goes the shenanigans of the elite while the public remains in a stupor.

"The Times wants a pyrrhic victory, that's a win with consequences, so we can say that more diplomacy should have been tried. This kind of a game, playing with vital information makes me extremely angry. There's no question that today's front page of the nation's most powerful newspaper does not reflect the truth of the battlefield."

We are winning this war, as evidenced by virtually ANY objective measurment you can conceive. I have a hard time with anyone who refuses to see this one simple point. Some might attribute this effect to the lack of recent experience with a "real shooting war", and our cultural predilection toward resolving issues within 23 minutes so we can get back to that all-important "word from our sponsors", but I don't think that tells the whole story. This article, and others like it, make the great point that there are many in the mass media, who have an agenda that is diametrically opposed to the success of our campaign.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.